I Challenge Bullyville’s James McGibney to a Public Debate on Jerry Sandusky

The Bullyville Crusade

James McGibney of Bullyville, an online platform that claims to target cyberbullies, has recently been trying to discredit me for supporting Jerry Sandusky. McGibney calls Sandusky a “child predator and convicted pdophile.”

I say he’s an innocent man.

McGibney says:

“A jury found Sandusky guilty on 45 counts of child sxual abuse, crimes perpetrated against 10 boys over a 15-year period, resulting in a sentence that ensures he will spend the remainder of his life in prison.”

“I have launched www.jerrysandusky.net, which currently routes to a YouTube video describing how awful Sandusky truly is. As I build out the site on the backend, I will be meticulously illustrating what an absolute f*cking monster Sandusky is.”

You’re starting with a conclusion, James. But an honest investigator begins with questions, not answers.

I’ve spent two years studying the evidence. I’ve read the police reports, the transcripts, and the affidavits. There’s no physical proof. No contemporaneous complaint. Only stories that changed with time, therapy, and money.

McGibney says: 

“Furthermore, I will also illustrate how much of a monster Parlato is for trying to get this pedophile out of prison.”

“On behalf of all of Jerry Sanduski’s victims, GO **** YOURSELF FRANK PARLATO.”

“I will be launching www.jerrysanduski.net shortly.”
 

The language is cheap and loud. Nothing says moral authority like speaking for people you’ve never met, about a case you’ve never studied. I’ll respond quietly with documents you’ve never read. But first, I suggest you buy a domain that spells his name correctly. It’s Sandusky, not Sanduski.

A Bully for the Brand

McGibney wrote:

“I recently heard that you referred to me as an “anti-bullying” advocate. You couldn’t be more wrong, Frank. I’m a bullying advocate because sometimes you have to be a bully to beat a bully, and you’re a bully Frank…….and I just happen to be the founder of Bullyville. I really like my odds, Frank.

“Believe me when I tell you, I’m about to go scorched earth.”

Open Challenge

James, enough noise. I challenge you to a public debate.

The invitation stands — anytime, anywhere, before any fair moderator.  Bring your records, your facts — if you have any — and I’ll bring your contradictions. I’ll also bring police reports, transcripts, medical records, affidavits, trial documents, and newly discovered evidence you’ve never read.

No Outcry, No Contemporaneous Evidence

The documents show, for instance, a complete lack of physical evidence. There is no DNA, no medical records of injury, no torn clothing, and no contemporaneous police or school reports from the time of the alleged assaults. Not one of them even told a friend or a sibling. For 15 years of alleged serial abuse, not a single piece of physical or forensic evidence was ever presented. The case was built entirely on stories recalled years later. Those stories were not volunteered; they were solicited.

Police contacted hundreds of Second Mile alumni, and hundreds of them said Sandusky was the gentlest, kindest, most caring man they had ever met. The accusations from the handful of accusers emerged only after extensive memory therapy and legal consultation. Every one of them knew – they were adults – that there were millions Penn State would pay. All they had to do was “remember” abuse.

The stories were not just remembered; some of them were mutually exclusive. Two key accusers, Aaron Fisher and Sebastian Paden, both claimed identical “every weekend” abuse over the same years—in the same room, in the same bed -a physical impossibility confirmed by their own mothers.

Finally, the process itself was corrupted. The prosecutors who secured the conviction, Frank Fina and Joseph McGettigan, later controlled a $12 million Penn State settlement trust for one accuser, Paden, drawing fees from it—a clear, if not criminal, financial conflict. Prosecutors should not coach witnesses to lie and then take a piece of the civil settlements.

Exculpatory evidence was suppressed, including a janitor’s statement that Sandusky was not the man seen in the shower and an affidavit from the actual “Victim 2” (Allan Meyers) swearing no abuse occurred. The judge pressured the defense attorney to waive the preliminary hearing at an off-the-record, probably illegal hotel meeting, and the trial was rushed in just seven months, preventing a proper investigation.

Sandusky’s documented testicular atrophy made several alleged acts physically implausible.

The Scholars Who Spoke Out

I am not alone in questioning the fairness of Sandusky’s conviction. Before his death in 2025, Dr. Frederick Crews, professor emeritus at UC Berkeley and author of The Memory Wars and Freud: The Making of an Illusion, declared that the Sandusky case was “the exact opposite of what the public believes.”

Crews’ essay “Saint Sandusky?” published on Frank Report was endorsed by scholars including Noam Chomsky, Elizabeth Loftus, Carol Tavris, Richard Leo, and Jerry Coyne.

Sandusky’s conviction rested on recovered-memory testimony, media hysteria, and financial incentive, not physical or corroborative evidence.

Other professionals—John Ziegler, Ralph Cipriano, John Snedden, and Mark Pendergrast —have each conducted extensive, independent, evidence-based investigations that align with my findings.

In a YouTube video released just before his death, Charlie Kirk warned of a “gold-rush effect” in high-profile sex cases—using Jerry Sandusky as his example. “You saw this with the Sandusky case at Penn State,” he said. “You can get a bandwagon effect where people use half-truths to get money from a guy with assets.”

The recovered-memory theory used in the Sandusky case has been widely discredited by psychologists and courts alike.
Teenagers do not simply “forget” years of sexual abuse and later “remember” it through therapy.

In this case, those “memories” were revived only after therapy arranged by civil lawyers—therapy that conveniently led to multimillion-dollar settlements from Penn State.

Still Proclaiming Innocence

Thirteen years later, Jerry Sandusky still maintains his innocence. At his 2012 sentencing, Sandusky told Judge John Cleland: 

“I did not do these alleged disgusting acts.”

At his 2019 resentencing, he again said:

“I apologize that I’m unable to admit remorse for something I didn’t do.”

Defense attorney Al Lindsay called it “the worst injustice in the history of American jurisprudence.”

I hope McGibney will debate and also put the results on his website. If he’s looking for truth, he’ll find it.

Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.

Frank Parlato

Frank Parlato is an investigative journalist, media strategist, publisher, and legal consultant.

See Full Bio